Tripoli, Libya – Amid a flurry of regional diplomacy and intelligence manoeuvring, Libya’s political crisis stands at a critical juncture. A new United States-backed initiative aiming to end the country’s institutional divide and unify its executive authorities has gained notable traction in the east, in effect putting the ball in the court of western Libyan factions.
Spearheaded by Massad Boulos, the US presidential adviser for Middle Eastern and African affairs, the plan focuses on forming a unified government, integrating state institutions and encouraging American oil investments. While Boulos has pitched the proposal as a complement to ongoing United Nations efforts, the initiative has led to intense debate over whether Washington can successfully bridge Libya’s traditional divides, or if this plan will simply join a long list of failed settlements.
Breaking the silence in Tripoli
The political quiet in western Libya was abruptly broken on June 21 when Abdul Hakim Belhaj, a prominent political figure and former commander of the Tripoli Military Council, issued a statement officially backing the US initiative.
Belhaj, who currently heads the al-Watan Party, called on the Tripoli-based Government of National Unity (GNU) to clearly state its position on the proposal. He described the US plan as an “opportunity to accelerate reaching political solutions that end the current state of political division,” stressing that any settlement under current circumstances must be based on the “possible and acceptable” rather than the “perfect but impossible”.
While Belhaj’s political presence has diminished in recent years, his endorsement carries significant symbolic weight in western Libya. His statement comes weeks after the eastern-based forces of military commander Khalifa Haftar and more than 100 members of the eastern-based House of Representatives (HoR) expressed support for the American plan.
Aisha al-Tabalqi, a member of the HoR, told Al Jazeera that the US initiative distinguishes itself by relying on an understanding between the two primary factions wielding actual influence on the ground. The emergence of supportive voices in the West, she noted, could enhance the initiative’s chances of broader acceptance.
However, the true extent of the initiative’s support remains contested. Mohammed al-Maazab, a member of the High Council of State (HCS), revealed that several HoR members privately told him their names had been added to the list of supporters without their prior knowledge. Al-Maazab dismissed Belhaj’s move as an attempt to “present himself as a party that can be part of any future political arrangements,” calling it a “leap in the air that will not significantly affect the balance of power”.
A political roadmap or a family ‘deal’?
The mechanics of the American proposal have faced heavy scrutiny from Libyan analysts who fear the initiative may entrench a prolonged power-sharing arrangement rather than paving the way for democracy.
During a recent episode of Al Jazeera Arabic’s Beyond the News (Ma Wara’ al-Khabar), political analyst Abdulsalam al-Rajhi criticised the effort, arguing it is “closer to a deal than an initiative”. Al-Rajhi suggested that Boulos, lacking extensive diplomatic experience, is seeking a quick geopolitical victory.
“The problem facing Boulos’s deal is that it is designed around specific individuals,” al-Rajhi said, citing widespread leaks that the plan aims to install Saddam Haftar—son of eastern commander Khalifa Haftar, as the head of a new Presidential Council, and Ibrahim Dbeibah, nephew of current GNU Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah, as the new prime minister. Al-Rajhi pointed out that both men were heavily implicated in a recent UN Panel of Experts report detailing illicit oil smuggling and financial misappropriation.
Conversely, Senussi Ismail, a Tripoli-based political analyst, argued that despite legitimate fears of a dictatorial relapse or family rule, the current political deadlock necessitates taking calculated risks.
“The majority view is that there should be positive engagement with Boulos’s initiative,” Ismail said, emphasising that the US plan must be merged with the existing UN roadmap. He stressed that any new unified government must be bound by strict timelines leading directly to presidential and legislative elections, preventing the new authorities from clinging to power indefinitely.
William Lawrence, a former US diplomat and professor of international affairs, defended the American engagement. “The only path Boulos can work on as a first step is finding economic solutions and unifying Libya’s economic institutions,” Lawrence said. “I believe he comes with good intentions and is trying to reach a comprehensive, sustainable solution … I do not see any alternative plan at present.”
Regional manoeuvring
The debate over the US initiative is unfolding against a backdrop of intense regional mobilisation. Last week, foreign ministers from Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye met with Boulos in Cairo to discuss the Libyan file. Simultaneously, Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced the formation of a new “R-4” regional mechanism, comprising Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye, aimed at supporting regional stability.
This diplomatic push has been matched by notable intelligence activities on the ground in Libya:
- In the West: Egyptian intelligence chief Hassan Rashad visited Tripoli for rare talks with GNU Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah.
- In the East: Turkish intelligence chief Ibrahim Kalin visited Benghazi to meet with Saddam Haftar, discussing efforts to unify institutions and enhance stability.
Faisal Bwalraiga, a national security researcher, told Al Jazeera that these parallel movements reflect an international effort to cultivate an environment conducive to new political arrangements.
“Libya is currently moving between two possibilities: reaching a new political settlement, or rearranging the balance of power between the different parties,” Bwalraiga said. He noted that Washington views its initiative as a lever to support the UN track, rather than a replacement for it.
For now, the GNU has not issued a formal position on the US plan. Elias al-Barouni, a political analyst, suggested that the government’s caution is calculated, aimed at preserving political manoeuvring space, avoiding Western camp divisions, and waiting for Washington’s final stance to crystallise.
